apostolicfathers0201clem - Carmel Apologetics

248 EPISTLES OF S. IGNATIUS.
throughout the thirteen letters the same doctrines are maintained, the same
heresies assailed, and the same theological terms employed. In this
respect no difference can be traced between the two sets of epistles.
(c)
The same is true likewise of their literary obligations. This is
the case with the plagiarisms from the genuine Ignatius (e.g.
the use of
the characteristic Ignatian o vat/x.Tji' ; Ign. Mar. 2, Tars. 8, 10, Ant. 12,
14, Hero 6, 8, Trail. 13, Philad. 4, besides Magn. 2, 12, Ephes. 2,
Polyc. I, 6, Rom. 5, in which latter passages it is taken from the preexisting
text), though naturally these plagiarisms are more frequent and
more obvious in the Additional Epistles, where the forger was left
to himself and an Ignatian colouring was wanted, than in the interpolations
of the Seven, where the Ignatian substratum was ready to
hand. Still more decisive are the passages taken from the Apostolic
Constitutions. If the reader will follow out the references given below
(p. 262), he will find that they extend throughout these Ignatian
Epistles, and that the use made of this work differs in no wise in the
two sets of letters. The same also may be said of the obligations to
Eusebius {Ign. Mar. 4, Trail. 9, Magn. 6, 8, 9, Philad. i, 6, Ant. i, 7),
though these are much scantier.
(d) In style and expression also the Additional Letters are closely
linked with the interpolated portions of the Seven. Thus we find in
both sets of epistles the same terms applied to false teachers. They are
'dumb dogs' {Ant. 6, Ephes. 7; see the note on the former passage);
they are 'foxes ' or 'fox-like ' (a'AwTrr;^, aXwTro's, Philad. 3, Ajit. 6); they
are 'serpents' {Philad. 6, Ant. 6); they are 'wolves in sheep's skins'
{\vKo